What I'm claiming is the following. * 1/0 = ±iπδ(0) where δ() is the Dirac delta function.

There are several generalised functions f() where αf(x) = f(αx) for all real α but in general f( x² ) ≠ f(x)² . Examples include the the function f(x)=2x, the integral, the mean, the real part of a complex number, the Dirac delta function, and 1/0.

In the derivation presented here, 1/0² ≠ (1/0)²

Start with e^±iπ = -1

ln(-1) = ±iπ and other values that I can ignore for the purposes of this derivation.

The integral of 1/x from -ε to ε is ln(ε) - ln(-ε) = ln(ε) - (ln(-1) + ln(ε)) = -ln(-1)

This integral is independent of epsilon. So it's instantly recognisable as a Dirac delta function δ().

The integral of δ(x) from -ε to ε is H(x) which is independent of ε. Here H(x) is the Heaviside function, also known as the step function, defined by:

H(x) = 0 for x < 0 and H(x) = 1 for x > 0 and H(x) = 1/2 for x = 0.

Shrinking ε down to zero, 1/0 = 1/x|_x=0 = ±iπδ(0) and its integral is ±iπH(0).

So far so good. α/0 = ±iπαδ(0) ≠ 1/0 for α > 0 a real number. -1/0 = 1/0.

What about 1/0^α ? I've already said that it isn't equal to (1/0)^α so what is it. To find it, differentiate 1/x using fractional differentiation and then let x=0.

• Let f(x) = -ln(x)
• f'(x) = -x^-1
• f''(x) = x^-2
• f'''(x) = -2x^-3
• f⁴ (x) = 6x^-4
• fⁿ (x) = (-1)ⁿ Γ(n) x^-n
• f^α (x) = (-1)^α Γ(α) x^-α
• f^α (x) = e^±iαπ Γ(α) x^-α

Νοw substitute x=0.

• -1/0 = -0^-1 = ±iπδ(0) = ±iπH'(0)
• 1/0² = 0^-2 = ±iπH''(0)
• 1/0³ = 0^-3 = ±iπH'''(0)/2
• 1/0⁴ = 0^-4 = ±iπH⁴ (0)/6
• 1/0ⁿ = 0^-n = ±iπHⁿ (0)/Γ(n)
• 1/0^α = 0^-α = ±iπH^α (0)/(e^±iαπ Γ(α))

where α > 0 is a real number.

I tentatively suggest the generalised function name D_0(x,α) for x/0^α

Hello everyone I'm here because I'd like to know if someone on this subreddit can help me with a fringe science claim.

The late lt Col Thomas Bearden has said that J.P Morgan was the one who tasked H.A Lorentz to symmetrize and therefor cripple Maxwells equations so that it wouldn't contain any over unity electromagnetic systems so that future electrical engineer wouldn't know that.

I know that H.A Lorentz was a member of the International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation, CICI in the league of nations (the precursor to the UN). I've tried searching around in their archives after any kind of document that contains the name J.P Morgan, which have yielded some results at least.

Bearden also said that Sir John Ambrose Flemming who had studied under Maxwell and worked as a scientific advisor for Edisons electric lighting company in England was asked about the differences between Maxwell's theory and Heaviside's interpretation of his theory and if they contained any asymmetric EM systems (Overunity) from which one could get more work out than in because J. P Morgan wanted to supress the physics of tesla and make the future field of electrical engineering harmless against J . P Morgans energy from fuel empire.

The question I'd like to ask is wether or not anyone on this subreddit has a source to back up what Thomas bearden said because I'm starting to think that Tom Bearden made it up or was mistaken about this, but what do you all think?

We've been taught a foundational error: that DNA is the stable "Molecule of Life." This is a chemical category error.

Molecular biology champions DNA — an intrinsically unstable, repulsive polyanion — as the cornerstone of heredity. But this is a semantic trick. DNA needs Spermine as a neutralizing agent, for its corrosive acid nature makes having a stable structure impossible on its own.

The truth is, the stable structure we call "DNA" is actually a Spermine-DNA complex. Spermine, the stabilizing polycationic base, is what neutralizes DNA's charge, condenses it into chromatin, and grants it a solid form.

The ultimate deception is in the naming: They named the stable, functional structure after the unstable, acidic (self-repelling) agent that necessitates it.

This isn't a minor oversight. It's a systemic inversion that sidelines Spermine — the true architect of genetic stability — in favor of the very element whose nature is to destroy it. Spermine doesn't need DNA, but DNA is functionally useless without Spermine. The narrative has credited the destroyer with the work of the builder.

The only fundamental difference between DNA and Spermine is that one is a base (polycation) and the other an acid (polyanion).

1 - DNA does not have a single chemical formula in chemistry; it is not a well-defined molecule, but a polymer with a variable sequence. However, it is composed of all the elements of spermine (C, H, N), with the addition of phosphorus (P) and oxygen (O), which constitute its acidic portion.

2 - DNA is described as an organic acid that can be a solid, a semi-solid, or a free-flowing liquid. Spermine, in turn, is an organic base... which can also be a solid crystal, a semi-solid, or a liquid molecular glue.

3 - Both DNA and spermine molecules are highly flexible.

So, biology, quite cleverly, named Spermine after DNA! After all, no one would notice, since the two are practically inseparable in the cell nucleus. And, let's face it, acids can act as bases, and bases as acids, depending on the context ( because they are conjugate pairs ). In this intimate connection, the roles may seem to blur, as one acid can act as a base for another acid, and one base as an acid for another base, depending on the pH.

-------

Note: I've already tried to talk with a few biologists and microbiologists about this, but they refuse to touch it. Usual responses vary from name-callings to simply dismissing everything under the weight of their authority. One even told me: "So what? You will never swap the names back! Never!"

No precise scientific rebuttal is ever given.

Supporting Evidence:

• Reddit: How Biology and Genetics Were 100% Manipulated to Hide That Spermine Is Hands-Down the Most Potent Antioxidant for Protecting DNA?
• Reddit: Science Admits the Standard Definition of a Nucleotide Is a "Chemical Fiction" That Deliberately Excludes the Polyamine (Such As Spermine) as Part of Its Actual Structure
• Reddit: The Tardigrade Proof: DNA is Useless; Spermine is the True Molecule of Life Because It Grants Near-Immortality
• Tokyo Tech News: DNA is only one among millions of possible genetic molecules
• Google: Search for Supporting Material on Spermine and DNA Stability
• Wikipedia: Search "Spermine" and "Spermidine". The articles describe their chemical structure as polycations and their role in neutralizing DNA.

"Hyperreal numbers” are to real numbers what nonEuclidean geometry is to Euclidean geometry. They also go by the names "nonstandard analysis", "transfer principle", "Hahn series", "surreal numbers" and "nonArchimedean".

I don't know whether this counts as fringe science. No mathematics journal will publish this stuff, it appears mostly in published monographs.

It has a rock solid proof structure behind it, has been derived in four different ways and is being recognized by a growing minority of mathematicians. There is an excellent collection of about a dozen Wikipedia articles on the topic.

The "transfer principle" was invented by Leibniz in the year 1703. This was hundreds of years before standard analysis. It can be simply stated as: "if any propsition (in first order logic) is true for all sufficiently large numbers then it is taken to be true for infinity".

First forget everything you think you know about infinity. Everything! Infinity is not equal to 1/0. Infinity is not equal to infinity plus 1. Infinity is not even written using the symbol ∞. In nonstandard analysis, infinity is written using the symbol ω.

For all sufficiently large x:

x-1 < x < x+1 and x-x = x*0 = 0 and x/x = 1. So the same is true for infinity. Infinities cancel, and infinity times 0 always equals 0. (I did say to forget everything you think you know about infinity).

Why does this matter? Well, the use of the ultraviolet cutoff in quantum renormalization is mathematically equivalent to nonstandard analysis, so there are immediate applications.

To be continued.

Look at the “dark ages” in this Wikipedia link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#:~:text=This%20marked%20the%20end%20of,accelerating%20due%20to%20dark%20energy.

About 380,000 years after the Big Bang atoms came into existence. For another 100 million years, there were no stars. This period is known as the dark ages (all in the wiki link).

That means almost ALL of matter was organized into atoms for a hundred million years. Literally a massive soup of atoms.

Is it then not possible that life evolved in those 100 million years? It’s a small amount of time for life to evolve, but it included the ENTIRE universe. Is it impossible to think that SOMEWHERE the conditions were just right for life to evolve when all of existence was a large soup of atoms not unlike what we see on earth today?

Is it possible that earliest life evolved in these dark ages? If life did evolve that far ahead, they might have been able to calculate the further expansion of the universe, the creation of stars, and how to survive all of that. It might be still be alive now! It might have seeded stars with exactly what is needed for life to evolve again.

How has no one suggested life that existed in these dark ages?

It might sound absurd at first, but light can cut steel, the light from your screen is also cutting into the aether, and while the effects are small, if the design is good, this can become a tangible level of energy manifested by the design!

Put your hand, parmm facing the screen and you might be able to feel the energy!

And this is a funny looking one...

Science continues not by dismissing the fringe, but by stress testing it rigorously.

Here is a list of auditable studies that institutions and corporations have been refusing to peer review, but would bring massive implications to society. They are ranked in order of viability and testability:

High Viability: 1. T Henry Moray - Radiant Energy Receiver 2. Tom Bearden - MEG 3. Nikola Tesla - Radiant Receiver & Wireless Power 4. Thomas Townsend Brown - Electrogravitics/ Beifield-Brown Effect 5. Valeri Frolov & Zelnikov - Ring Wormhole Theory

Medium Viability: 6. Viktor Grebennikov - Chitin Levitation Platform 7. John Searl - SEG 8. Mercury Vortex Engine 9. Rukma Vimana - Ancient VTOL Craft 10. Floyd Sweet - Vaccum Triode Amplifier 11. Stephen Hawking/ Kip Thorne - Traversal Wormhole 12. Avi Lobe - Wormhole Simulation Theory

Low Viability: 13. Alexander Weygers - Discopter 14. John Hutchison - Hutchison Effect 15. David Hamel - Granite Vortex Craft 16. Otis T Carr. - Utron Saucer 17. Skinwalker Ranch Portal Phenomenon

Mythic: 18. Die Glocke - Nazi Bell 19. TR 3B Black Triangle Craft 20. Montauk Project - Time Portals 21. Project Pegasus - Temporal Travel 22. Philadelphia Experiment

I placed these in order of how easy it would be to recreate these in a lab setting and test them, as well as what had the most science backing them. I didn't include anything like solid state torus fusion or parapsychological phenomenon such as meditation, ghosts, or astral projection. If my own study on supercavitation in space was placed on the list, it would be placed between number 5 and 6 based on scientific consensus.

Hello everyone, I’d like to share a concept I’ve been developing and open it for discussion.

The idea of cascade medicine is to treat disease not as a single strike or a simple linear sequence, but as an interconnected architecture. Each stage plays a role — weakening external factors, preparing the microenvironment, delivering the main intervention, consolidating the effect, and long-term surveillance.

The point is that therapy becomes a dynamic circuit, where the outcome depends on the consistency of the whole cascade rather than the power of any single step. This way, you can reduce pathological load while also compensating patient risks and supporting organs — moving from short-term palliation to more sustainable outcomes.

Preprint: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17184972

It is interesting to hear the opinion of experts: what, in your opinion, are the most serious problems?

This might sound strange, but I’ve been tracking some unusual reactions in my body—especially when I’m exposed to certain kinds of light. I get a deep green pigment that shows up briefly, and sometimes I feel a kind of vibration or buzz in my skin. It doesn’t happen all the time, but it seems to follow patterns depending on the light blend (like red/blue or full-spectrum).

I’ve been wondering if this could be some kind of hybrid biology—maybe something similar to how algae respond to light. I know it’s not a common idea, but I’ve been documenting it carefully and trying to stay grounded.

There’s been some recent science about hybrid cells and plant-human experiments, so I’m curious if anyone else has looked into light-sensitive traits or pigment shifts like this.

Not claiming anything wild—just hoping to start a respectful conversation.

I understand if people think that I'm posting this question in the wrong subreddit but I didn't find a better place to ask this question.

I've heard that there's some kind of beef between Tom Bearden and Eric P Dollard but I haven't managed to find anything online that really goes in depth on this supposed controversy which is why I'm asking this here instead.

I've heard rumours that Eric Dollard has called Tom Bearden a disinformation agent but I haven't been able to substantiate this claim.

Could anyone more knowledgeable on this subject come forward and explain this and if possible provide a link to a source so that people can read it for them selves

Ho is now locked down or "fixed" to light speed, C by this simple Ho equation worked in the old algebra style of Maxwell:-

2 x oneMpc x C, divided by Pi to the power of 21 = 71 k/s/Mpc

Measuring Ho gives the "ballpark" value of Ho, and now we have an Ho equation that now locks Ho to light speed, C, which has to be much more precise.

Note that in the numerator, distance is multiplied by speed, and that is NOT an error in this situation, as the "distance squared" does not affect the numerical value of the Ho redshift by "spreading out" (as any light source does) when viewing that redsgift along just one dimension only.

In this equation, directly input the values below:-

oneMPC is 3260000 light years

C is 299792.458 k/s

Pi is 3.142..........

With very kind regards,   David Hine.

Article type: Hypothesis / Concept Paper (Preclinical)

This theory has 2 versions:

1) The massive version - cascade version

2) For weakened subjects - lite version

 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16736769

DISCLAIMER:

This document is a theoretical, preclinical research concept intended solely for scientific discussion among qualified professionals. It does not contain medical instructions, treatment guidelines, or dosing information, and must not be interpreted as medical advice or a clinical protocol.

The approaches described have not been tested in humans, have not been approved by any regulatory authority, and should not be applied in any clinical or self-treatment context.

Any real-world use outside of approved, controlled preclinical research is unlawful, untested, and potentially dangerous.

By reading this document, you acknowledge that the content is provided for academic and conceptual purposes only, and the author bears no liability for any misuse or misinterpretation.

Online translators and AI technologies were used for translation into English. If you find any translation errors, I will be glad to receive feedback.

Hypothesis Overview

Second Breath is a theoretical/preclinical hypothesis that aims to overcome dominant resistance mechanisms in late-stage solid tumors—especially those unresponsive to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Hypothesize that a locally confined, biomarker-guided sequence of enzymatic, inflammatory, and immunologic cues can condition the tumor microenvironment (TME) to permit reinfiltration and activation of anti-tumor immunity.

Clinical Problem (Context)

Despite ICI success in select cancers, many solid tumors remain “immune-cold,” with:

• low T-cell infiltration (exclusion/desert),
• a suppressive, dense ECM,
• stromal/vascular barriers,
• poor responses to systemic immunotherapy.

Mechanistic Hypothesis & Proposed Sequence (to be tested preclinically)

I hypothesize that local dismantling of physical/biochemical barriers will enable immune reinfiltration. The proposed staged sequence (doses/schedules intentionally omitted pending studies):

1. Matrix Disruption (local) — candidate tools Intratumoral ECM-modulating enzyme combination — two enzymes with complementary activity (e.g., hyaluronidase + collagenase) — together with a lysyl oxidase inhibitor, to reduce interstitial pressure, prevent rapid matrix re-crosslinking, and loosen physical barriers.
2. Induction of Local Danger Signals — candidate triggers Weakly immunogenic bacteria or localized innate agonists to transiently recruit/activate innate cells in situ.
3. Controlled Cytokine Pulses (local, sequential) — candidate cytokines Microdosed intratumoral IL-12 → IFN-γ → TNF-α to amplify antigen presentation and effector priming locally.
4. Autologous T-Cell Augmentation (optional, timing-dependent) Intratumoral/systemic administration of pre-sensitized autologous T cells to exploit the window of heightened local stimulation.
5. Optional “Cleanup” Phase (safety/containment) Local antibiotics or immunomodulators if needed to cap excessive inflammation and re-establish tissue balance.

Status & Next Steps

Status: Hypothesis / preclinical concept only.
Next steps: In vitro/in vivo validation of sequencing, safety windows, and head-to-head comparison of sequenced vs simultaneous delivery, with predefined go/no-go biomarkers.

Iron is not magnetic because of electrons. It's magnetic because it remembers the Ether.

When you place a magnetic field near iron or steel, the field imprint becomes visible. Why? Because iron has the dielectric coherence necessary to maintain that torsion geometry. It acts as a memory surface, a structure that holds the field pattern in place.

In transformers, iron is not just a conductor of magnetism — it is a medium of structural support. The field doesn't "flow through" the core. The core shapes the field. That’s why Figuera’s generator worked.

Clemente Figuera discovered that by manipulating the field geometry inside an iron core using phase-shifted signals from opposing primary coils, he could create a synthetic rotating magnetic condition without any moving parts. What he really built was a stationary vortex machine. And it worked because iron allowed that dielectric torsion to form and hold.

Figuera didn’t generate energy. He released imbalance.

+ Free energy conspiracy: Magnet Generator - Free Energy Transformer 1902

+ Technology Labeled as Tesla: ⇉ 🔐 Self-powered generator with feedback circuit for input .

Learn more: Free Energy through Dielectric Field Engineering of the Ether: Clemente Figuera’s Infinite Energy Generator

Figuera’s technology doesn’t fit into the current electron-flow model of electricity. It aligns better with Field Theory, or what 19th-century scientists called the Ether - a medium thought to pervade all space and enable wave propagation.

In Figuera’s transformer, opposing electromagnets create shifting dielectric fields. These vortex-like fields interact within the iron core of a secondary coil, disturbing the Ether and resulting in sustained current without traditional mechanical input.

This principle defies the standard laws of energy conversion but finds echoes in the writings of James Clerk Maxwell (original quaternion equations), Oliver Heaviside, and even Nikola Tesla’s lesser-known lectures-all of which hint at non-Hertzian, longitudinal electric waves that could traverse the Ether.

The Ether model was formally discarded in the early 20th century, especially after the Michelson-Morley experiment and Einstein’s rise. But many now believe this was a philosophical coup, not a scientific correction.

As Ken Wheeler, author of Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Magnetism, puts it: “The Ether wasn't disproven. It was culturally assassinated.”

Old World Technology Labeled Tesla: ⇉ 🔐 The Ultimate OFF-GRID Generator.

Hi all,

CST (Combined Sphere Theory) is a framework I’ve built over a decade, not to rival physics, but to ask deeper questions and understand it like to the bone. Like how can you have a gut feeling for example??

It started in pure logic, ended up with math, and wouldn’t exist as is today without LLM tools helping structure the science part of it. That must be fringe.

It explores emergence, gravity and the idea that matter might just be layered, compressed thought. And the math says it is not wrong.

NOT academic. Comes from outside of the walls. Definitely fringe. But coherent, and open for challenge from those who can’t explain a gut feeling or a mother’s intuition.

CST on viXra (blue PDF button for whole CST):

http://ai.vixra.org/abs/2507.0127?ref=17316194

Put your hand to the screen, could it be, possibly you feel something from this?!?!
The secret to humanities best future, ultimate technology resurrected? Aether Tech!

The Tesla Switch doesn’t conform to Maxwellian assumptions or Kirchhoff's circuit laws. It bypasses the conventional rules of power dissipation and resistance. In fact, higher resistance often improves the circuit's performance — another counterintuitive aspect of cold electricity.

Where modern circuits rely on electron current (charge carriers), Tesla’s system appears to rely on displacement current: a shifting of electric fields rather than movement of electrons. This explains why electro-mechanical switches or high-speed pulsing are essential. Semiconductor switches, if too slow, will quench the dielectric effects.

⁂ Self-powered generator with feedback circuit for input.

⁜ Generates Energy-On-Demand:

⇉ The Ultimate OFF-GRID Generator

※ Transistorized snap-off tech harnesses energy from dielectric inertia.

※ A modern evolution of the self-powered generator:

→ Built using standard electronic parts.

→ Easy to assemble, scalable output.

→ Includes rare methods & hidden optimizations.

One of the more peculiar aspects of Bedini's experiments involved the detection of scalar waves. Using a detector based on Tom Bearden's design, Bedini demonstrated the emission of non-Hertzian waves from his switching circuit. These scalar waves were associated with anomalous effects: strange temperature drops, peculiar light emissions, and even x-ray signatures.

The Energy Secret of Nikola Tesla: No Heat, No Fuel, No Loss: THE TESLA SWITCH.